A more plausible, alternative explanation in my opinion is that the new builds are far more powerful than the old builds and as such they represent a high percentage of the top 1000 leaderboard. Are there any facts to support this hypothesis or quantifiable data metrics to support this idea.
A simple metric could be top GR clear. Three classes had build(s) that were buffed in patch 2.6.7: Barbarians, crusaders, and monks. The top worldwide GR clears in non-season) era 11 in comparison to era 12 have increased 9 GRs, 12 GRs, and 7 GRs, respectively, for these classes.
Logically, if the new AoV set/build was buffed to be equal to or close to the GR potential of the best prior crusader build, do you honestly think it would dominate the leaderboard to the degree it is now? Stated a different way: If you were pushing the leaderboard, would it be in your best interest to push the build that can clear a GR 150 in non-season or the build that can clear GR 138?
I have been reading recently about why people ignore facts/confirmation bias/motivated reasoning/backfire effect/evolutionary constraints on our thinking about needing to be social versus analytical. This could be an interesting read.
We could look here for lots of metrics that consider relative class strengths from era 11 and era 12.
@Negator,
I am still waiting to see if your data analysis is season or non-season?
Thatâs the spirit the leaderboard bean counters are not getting.
Iâm having a blast with my barb, but I want still want to play something else next season. Looking forward to S20 patch notes.
I ran into an interesting study done about 10 years ago about optimism and pessimism that included the realist category. Long story short, pessimists gave up on an impossible puzzle very quickly. Realists gave up after 5 - 8 tries. Optimists, who made up ~80% of the group, didnt give up even when told the puzzle was impossible.
I wish I could find that study, but I keep getting the more popular, âyou will live longer if you are an optimistâ websites. 10 years on the internet makes thing disappear unfortunately. Here is the Wikipedia description of the underlying cause.
I am hoping the wizard and barbarian new sets come out in different seasons. That way, I will not have to fight myself on which one to play and will be able to enjoy two seasons.
If they do come out at the same time, there goes my social life and stash space.
I too learned something new today, Someone mentioned an EU study about how piracy affects different media industries. I looked at both the clickbait-y summary and the study itself linked below. The study looked separately at movie, TV, books and games. Piracy is immoral and illegal; however, the financial implications are far more complex and occasionally counterintuitive to what I thought it would be.
I feel like there would be less complaints towards OP builds if there were more builds that can compete at the same level. Current OP builds wont be considered OP if every other build can play around the same GRs levels, and that should be what the balance team should be aiming for, all builds having an even playing field.
Monkâs SWK TR and POJ TR is just so similar, im amazed that they wasted so much time making something from scratch when they could just improve the TR build with SWK, and have POJ a different play style with a new mechanic. Someone or a team in D3 is doing half-assed projects instead of actually trying to build more better diversity.
POJ on PTR was very different, and a total loss. To quote Raxx - âworst build I ever played. In any game.â So they hastily reworked build mechanics.
Same with sader, only this was not that bad, and they overshot it and had to reign it in with an extra patch.
Yeah, some internal playtesting before PTR could have been helpful.
Bad question. Your personal opinion is not a fact.
If a build is bugged or truly through-the-roof (with people suddenly soloing 150 on non season), yes. Thatâs what a PTR is supposed to prevent.
If it is simply performing well and better than others, no. Buff others instead.
Edit: preventing full-quotes is a nice forum feature, but it should not do that with one line post quotes.
Motivated reasoning is a form of reasoning in which people access, construct, and evaluate arguments in a biased fashion to arrive at or endorse a preferred conclusion. The term motivated in motivated reasoning refers to the fact that people use reasoning strategies that allow them to draw the conclusions they want to draw (i.e., are motivated to draw). Of course, people are not always motivated to confirm their preferred conclusions. Actually, they sometimes are motivated to draw accurate conclusions. However, the term motivated reasoning refers to situations in which people want to confirm their preferred conclusion rather than to situations in which peopleâs reasoning is driven by an accuracy motivation.
So first of all guys, I was banned for a week for calling a troll a âmoron.â Go figure.
To respond in bulk:
-You are correct, and I was wrong: the calculations from DiabloProgress are Seasonal. I did not realize that you can look at who leads the boards on non-seasonal, but that the study of skills used is only seasons. However, an eyeballing of the NS boards suggests, at least for Barbs and Crusaders, that Rend and AoV are about as dominant.
-No, Free, the issue is not that Barbs are now good. I never disagreed with you about that, and really liked alot of your suggestions. Where you went wrong is demanding the Lamentation nerf be reverted. That build IS Barbarian. There is no such class as Barbarian anymore, its just Render. All other builds do not exist.
-Buffs not nerfs does not work when the buffed builds are at maximum capacity.
It would be much better if UE and Shadow where close to 140 but they are not. Not even close. The fact only 8% are using Rapid Fire (for strongest solo push build) says a lot.
